MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4322757553 · doi:10.1177/17531934231158992

Vascularized versus non-vascularized bone grafting for scaphoid nonunion without avascular necrosis: a randomized clinical trial

2023· article· en· W4322757553 on OpenAlexaff
S. Fan, Nina Suh, Joy C. MacDermid, Douglas C. Ross, Ruby Grewal

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hand Surgery (European Volume) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsSt Joseph's Health CareWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIliac crestNonunionSurgeryWristAvascular necrosisBone graftingDelayed unionRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this clinical trial, patients were randomized to receive a pedicled vascularized bone graft, based on the 1,2-intercompartmental supraretinacular artery, or a non-vascularized iliac crest graft. Fixation was done with K-wires. Union and time to union were assessed using CT scans at regular intervals. Twenty-three patients received a vascularized graft, and 22 received a non-vascularized graft. Thirty-eight patients were available for union assessment and 23 for clinical measurements. There were no significant differences in union incidence, time to union, incidence of complications, patient-reported outcome scores, or wrist mobility and grip strength at final follow-up between the treatment groups. Smokers were 60% less likely to achieve union, independent of graft type. When controlling for smoking, patients receiving a vascularized graft were 72% more likely to achieve union. Given our small sample size, results should be interpreted with caution. Level of evidence: I

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hand Surgery (European Volume)Same topicOrthopedic Surgery and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207